Jump to content
  • entries
    697
  • comments
    2,107
  • views
    448,734

8th Most Beautiful Female Character


Jean Valjean

5,621 views

8 - Selina Kyle

 

selina_kyle.png

:kaukau: What I like about Selina is that she's grounded. You'd think that since she wears a catsuit when ready for action that she'd be an action girl, and while she can often get her way out of tricky situations, she's not ridiculously good at fighting. Her skill set is dedicated more to the subtle art of cat burglary, which she pursues due to her own complicated Robin Hood reasons. Yet, in spite of her talent, she's not completely off the records. She needs a clean slate and has to risk quite a bit to get it, and unsuccessfully. It turns out that she can be caught by the police, and on top of that she knows when to be afraid, because Bane and his cronies are completely out of her league.

 

Contrast this to the typical action girl. Lately there was also someone named Natasha Romanov, also known as the Black Widow. She also wore a catsuit, although for some reason she unzipped it to display gratuitous cleavage. What gets at me with this character is that, as the action girl, she always has the upper hand, because no matter what she's skilled enough to fight herself out of even the most ridiculous situations, because at the end of the day she's the action girl and everyone else is just a thug. It's a very simple and blunt narrative, and I don't necessarily think that it's empowering to women. She's essentially a man's creation in a woman's suite, and there's no doubt that she was merely the product of the male imagination because I know male fantasies when I see them.

 

So Selina isn't really the action girl. I see her more as a skilled, elegant woman, with neither her talents nor her femininity turned into caricatures. The true virtues of being a woman, whatever they are, I am sure are far more complex than what most male authors can imagine. And it's true, because underneath I have the sense that she's far more intricate than Black Widow, who's blunt in comparison. This seems to me to be closer to a strong woman as women would imagine themselves.

 

At first I was against having her played by Anne Hathaway, bythaway (See what I did there?), but the more I thought about it the more I thought this was a dead-on choice, especially when paired with the older sense of fashion the character subtley embraces, which look very good on Anne. She has that very plain and traditional beauty that matched the type of character Selina was: human in her limits but still cunning and graceful.

 

As a side note, I had actually expected Nolan would cast Ellen Page as Selina, since I could have seen her playing the role and he had already brought up just about everybody else from Inception.

 

selina_wayne.png

You know that slight romance between her and Batman? I totally ship it. She doesn't need romance, and it seems out of her character for her to care for Bruce, but that's what makes for a relationship, because a good relationship isn't necessarily something you need or something you're looking for. I just thought that her brand of femininity truly complemented Bruce Wayne's brand of masculinity. They don't share everything in common and are fairly different personalities, but they balance each other out, which while not completing each other (because they're already complete), it certainly completes the single unit that is their partnership.

 

So I'm glad that this character made it big in cinematic history. I'm sure she'll be helpful as an example when explaining certain philosophies about love and human nature.

 

24601

93 Comments


Recommended Comments



Y'know, that would be a nice reply if it weren't for the fact that guarded statement mentioned involved denying an entire half of humanity a basic right. Kinda ruins it.

Link to comment

Of course, it's obvious that you were referring to physical fighting. I could most likely make a long case for why I don't like the idea of woman in the military, or why I believe that men should fight in wars rather than women, but not only would it be rather edgy regarding BZP rules, but I also feel it would detract from the purpose of the blog entry. To add to that, this is not a position I can fluently defend. Defend, yes, but not fluently.

 

 

Yes, you may call me sexist if you want. I will laugh if you do.

 

Mm-hmm. Sure.

 

You are the on advocating denying some the right to do battle and defend their nation simply because of their gender. Someone is in error here, but I respectfully submit that it isn't who you think it is.

Link to comment

Good for you.

 

Considering you outright stated you were in favor of treating someone differently because of their biology, I fail to see how you can even defend such a position.

Link to comment

"I'm totally not sexist but woman shouldn't serve in the military."

 

Seem to be the gist of your defense. I'm fairly certain the contradiction is apparent.

Link to comment

:kaukau: I'm just going to detach myself and look at the situation this way: Yes, Basilisk and others have an easier position to defend, and Zarayna has a harder position to defend, but that is in part because he can't share the entirety of his views due to constraints here at BZPower. I submit that you are both obviously in error because no one's argument is perfect, and that it's possible to have reasons for not wanting women in the military without following through with the implications and ideology stated. The implications of his statement, I am assuming, are different, and while the soundness of his views might be in question, I am assuming that they are at least valid. That being said, due to constraints he cannot give a full exposition on his views, and thus this discussion cannot serve its full discourse and it shows lack of tact to wish to pursue it, other than to find one way to drag one member down with statements about how he's disrespecting other members.

 

Before people jump to conclusions and think that I'm defending Zarayna because I agree with him, know that I do not. However, I still think that his reasons are valid and don't follow the implications that some people are trying to throw on him with Straw Man arguments.

 

Now, in response to Zarayna's comment about Eponine, keep in mind that this isn't a list of best female characters. I'm operating off of beauty, and in part these calls are based off of what I have found visually powerful about a character's depiction. I have not ever seen a Les Miserables movie. However, the actresses that I have seen play her on stage have always been beautiful. Remember, too, that I said I was going to try to get this list done before the Les Miserables movie came out and turned this entire list upside down.

 

Also to Velox, who I know has been reading this and disagrees strongly with my attraction to Selina Kyle: I completely understand his reasons. However, I also completely understand my reasoning behind this list, which isn't exactly some sort of authoritative, detached source. So therefore I just plain like Selina Kyle and think she's cool.

 

24601

Link to comment

I respectfully submit that any ideology that denies someone a basic right is fundamentally indefensible if we are using anything resembling logic, regardless of the circumstances.

Link to comment

I said nothing that I was sexist. To call me such is entirely on your part. Furthermore, I must apologize for any bluntness, but please.

 

 

Please.

 

Be rational. Not raging, not flying into a tizzy, not being irrationally sarcastic. Just nice, civil and rational. Deal?

 

Don't make massive assumptions, 'kay? I say one thing, you assume I'm a bigot. I make a guarded statement and you assume you know my principles by heart. Seriously. I don't have a problem with woman not being in the kitchen, I don't have a problem with men being in the kitchen. If a man wants to cook, that's their choice, if a woman doesn't, that's hers, and vice versa. You're serious applying a label to me based on a few sparsely worded posts, and that's seriously not cool.

 

I don't believe women are stronger than men. Bam, we run into definitions of strength. Women can be very, very strong. Mother Teresa and other such amazing woman far outstep men like me in terms of strength. When it comes to men being physically stronger or not, it's all relative. My reasoning for the subject is a lot wider than that. As I said, it's also a lot different than this blog entry. Woman warrior? On topic. Military? Not so much.

So....are you going to actually explain what you meant by not wanting women in the military? I'm applying the label because that's how it comes across. I'm inviting you to defend yourself and not look like an idiot. And you aren't doing that, you're just saying 'I'll just laugh if you call me sexist' which is no defence at all.

 

I'm sure you can back up your argument with the subtlety that keeps it in line with the rules. Personally, I'd rather break the rules and not look like a bigot, but that's just me. If it's the debate itself that you think might be breaking rules because it's somehow 'political', you're wrong - we can discuss sexism the same way we can discuss stuff like racism, homophobia etc - these are all things that have an undeniable 'right' approach and therefore debate doesn't (or shouldn't) get too heated. Just you gotta back up your points, that's all.

 

I don't know why you just said you don't believe women are stronger than men - you've obviously ignored the point of my original reponse. There is no 'men are stronger' or 'women are stronger', there is 'these female bodybuilders are stronger than fat couch potato men' and 'these male bodybuilders are stronger than these fat couch potato women'. The point being that gender is entirely irrelevant, which therefore makes your opinion on women serving in the military entirely idiotic.

 

UNLESS you're able to provide some overwhelmingly innovative argument for your opinion - and if you are, then do so. If you're not, then you shouldn't have brought up such a stupid viewpoint in the first place. Apologies for not 'respecting' this opinion, but some opinions you really gotta go out of your way to disagree with or 'disrespect' because they're based on hatred and bigotry, and there's no place for that these days.

 

- Tilius

 

Link to comment

Heeeey guys. Just checking in here to remind y'all to keep it civil. Don't exaggerate each others' comments and keep rhetoric to a minimum (this goes for both sides). It's always great to have debates like this, just keep it under control or we'll have to step in.

 

Have fun, don't be mean.

Link to comment
I was originally going to post in response to the main entry, but I'll probably just post my own blog entry now that things have escalated so much. I do want to post one thing, though, in response to Basilisk:

Considering you outright stated you were in favor of treating someone differently because of their biology, I fail to see how you can even defend such a position.

 

Treating someone differently isn't necessarily wrong or sexist (and actually, those words come directly from a close female friend of mine). I do treat girls differently than guys -- I guess you could call it chivalry. If a guy is cold, and so am I, I'm going to keep my jacket on (I mean, if he's not like in really poor health or something, but just "normally" cold). But if a girl is cold and so am I, I'll offer her my jacket. I'll make a point to hold the door open for girls, but for guys, I'll only do it if it happens -- I won't specifically try to. And the list goes on. I'm not sure how treating a girl differently than a guy is sexist or wrong.
Link to comment

 

I was originally going to post in response to the main entry, but I'll probably just post my own blog entry now that things have escalated so much. I do want to post one thing, though, in response to Basilisk:

Considering you outright stated you were in favor of treating someone differently because of their biology, I fail to see how you can even defend such a position.

 

Treating someone differently isn't necessarily wrong or sexist (and actually, those words come directly from a close female friend of mine). I do treat girls differently than guys -- I guess you could call it chivalry. If a guy is cold, and so am I, I'm going to keep my jacket on (I mean, if he's not like in really poor health or something, but just "normally" cold). But if a girl is cold and so am I, I'll offer her my jacket. I'll make a point to hold the door open for girls, but for guys, I'll only do it if it happens -- I won't specifically try to. And the list goes on. I'm not sure how treating a girl differently than a guy is sexist or wrong.

 

See, I'd also call that sexist. 'Chivalry' exists due to guys wanting 'other stuff' with girls. I'm sure there are genuinely nice guys who do it out of being nice (and would therefore do the same regardless of gender), but otherwise it's niceness BECAUSE they're a girl and because the guy wants something else. It's 'socially accepted' sexism, basically.

 

Then again, that could mean being anything other than bisexual is sexist, lol. I suppose if you're only holding doors open for girls you want 'other stuff' with rather than EVERY girl then it isn't sexism, because it's down to them being nice/HAWT rather than being female. Hm. Tough one.

 

- Tilius

Link to comment

I'm not sure how. I do it for girls not because I want something from them, but because they're girls -- I'm instinctively nicer to them. I'm not looking for anything in return, it's just how I act. I think that women should be treated nicer than other guys, but not out of any sort of expectation.

Link to comment

Treating some differently on the basis of sex is, in fact, sexiest. It's right in the definition.

 

 

Unfair treatment or discrimination based on a difference of sex or gender.

  • The fact that there is only one woman in a management position in that company makes it easy to believe that sexism runs rampant there.

 

I would argue that letting the guy freeze in the cold but giving the girl a jacket is, in fact sexist based on this commonly accepted definition It is unfair treatment, albeit beneficial unfair treatment. Hardly as extreme has denying them the right to serve in the military however.

Link to comment

:kaukau: I read through the latest post in the debate (not including TMD's, and apparently Velox might snipe me before I'm done with this post), and I encountered the words "and cool dude" (when the latter two words are preceded by a grammatically incorrect "an", that's usually not a good sign), and "idiotic", after which point I knew there was something wrong. The latter term is a derivative of the former which gets translated to "cool dude". There's a reason why that word is censored. It's done that way to intentionally make people writing posts that would entail such word usage look silly so that they don't veer in the direction of that sort of language again, but more importantly so that people don't start expressing that sentiment. The sentiment can be seen in this discussion, and on principle this is something that the founders of the site did not intend to see happen. Therefore, I cannot support this conversation anymore, and if it continues in any form, those posts will be deleted, or such questionable content will be edited out at the very least. People are free to discuss the subject matter of this blog, which are the values found in the character of Selina Kyle and countdown in general. Let's keep the environment positive.

 

24601

Link to comment

Don't delete my comments. Apparently cutting off a discussion and censoring people is more important to you than rectifying a bigot's opinion, and you're fine with censorship yet not fine with insults.

 

You aren't allowed to spout such rubbish without backing it up. You just...aren't.

 

I don't believe black people should be allowed on buses. I don't want to go into why - I just want you all to know that.

 

You might not want to go into it, but you really should because right now you just look like a horrible person. And it'd take - what - two sentences to explain? Five tops?

 

Folk can continue here if they want. Heck, even if they don't want to, they probably should for their own dignity.

 

- Tilius

Link to comment

Can you go back to talking about Luna Lovegood again? :P

 

Or just continue on with the list and forget #8?

 

Kinda surprised at the outpouring of arguments here, and I'm more interested in seeing what other characters you're planning on highlighting.

 

:music:

Link to comment

:kaukau: I was going to delete those comments, too, but that link brings proper closure to this off-topic strand of discussion. I have deleted all continuations of the argument but yours, Tilius, since you seem to want it so badly, but really, the only reason these stay afloat just so passersby can look at your attitude and judge for themselves whether or not it's warranted or not.

 

Chols, that is a very funny image. I don't understand how that happened, but I will start a ticket on it if nobody else has.

 

Meanwhile, I really like Anne Hathaway now. She looks exceptionally stunning with her new haircut and I can't wait to see her in Les Miserables, where she will be even cooler by a factor of a hundred.

 

24601

Link to comment

 

I'm not sure how. I do it for girls not because I want something from them, but because they're girls -- I'm instinctively nicer to them. I'm not looking for anything in return, it's just how I act. I think that women should be treated nicer than other guys, but not out of any sort of expectation.

 

I absolutely know you don't mean anything by it, and are just being nice, and knowing what I do about your religious background, and especially the good chunk of it we share, what you're saying makes perfect sense and I know there's no sexist intent behind being chivalrous. It's a concept that's held in very high regard by the part of the population.

 

It's rooted in deep sexism. That doesn't mean you are, or that you're trying to be, or anything of the like. You want to be nice and chivalrous. Totes cool. Personally, I'd rather you be a nice guy to everyone, you know? What's it cost you? Hold the door open for everyone. Offer anyone who is cold your coat if you feel fine. I think that's even more impressive, personally. (Also, as someone who enjoys holding the door open for anyone and everyone, watching surprised faces from every type of person is a delight!)

 

See, chivalry in the regard of women comes from viewing women as unfit and unable to help themselves, as the code of a Knight was to protect all those who were weak (it was literally named as women, elderly, and children). It outright states that women are not capable themselves, and need a warrior man to keep them safe. The role of courtly love helps- not at all. Since as chivalry evolved, the dedication to one woman became the attempt to woo a married woman of the court, to become her secret lover. In this way, dedication to her would be an attempt to win her heart, in order to enter into an illicit relationship with her.

 

I mean, none of that sounds good, right?

 

(I don't think so, anyway.)

 

 

Of course, it's obvious that you were referring to physical fighting. I could most likely make a long case for why I don't like the idea of woman in the military, or why I believe that men should fight in wars rather than women, but not only would it be rather edgy regarding BZP rules, but I also feel it would detract from the purpose of the blog entry. To add to that, this is not a position I can fluently defend. Defend, yes, but not fluently.

No, that is a position you cannot defend, because it is wrong. Factually and morally. Even making the statement is something you should not have done, because you are wrong. You go on to complain about how misrepresented you're being based on this statement, but your statement was incredibly rude, sexist, and out of line with BZPower's rules. It is not a position you can defende- period. I suggest you abandon ship on that one now.

 

So hey guys. I am okay with discussion on sexism and culture and in movies, etcetera. However, not okay with endorsing views that belittle or condemn entire swaths of humanity for their genetic makeup. Those views aren't okay. They aren't respectful and they aren't defensible, and the expression of them is against the "Respect everyone" rule BZP holds as most sacred. Also be nice. You guys are getting a little too heated.

Link to comment

I fail to see what beauty has to do with combat effectiveness, but I can tell you right now that Black Widow's equipment is much better suited to her job than Catwoman's is. Beauty, however, is a very subjective subject, to the point that objectivity is impossible.

 

That having been said, I think Ron Swanson has the closest thing we have to a truly objective rubric of beauty.

Link to comment

All I have to say is that if the response to #8 was this bad, may God have mercy on us all when #7 is unveiled.

Just wait until you see the responses to #1.

Link to comment

Guest
This blog entry is now closed to further comments.
×
×
  • Create New...